17 comments:

Robert in Chicago
said...

That's just mean. Even Cam's brief bio is enough to show that he has to be very politically astute and good at thinking strategically about his own self-interest as well as being generally very bright. Chances are near zero that he didn't cover himself by passing on at least the gist of the concerns. So if his boss has already signed the deal and still wants it done, what is a poor general counsel to do?

I have another game for you to play. It's called the Mushroom Game. The idea is to spot the CEOs who burst out of obscurity by really outperforming their peers in a completely unexpected way (ie, in a way that isn't already priced into the stock.)

You get double points if the individual that you picked turns around a formerly struggling business.

You get a massive TEN X if the individual (or their firm) achieves minor celebrity status on the way.

John, Are you alluding to Kroll being the go to source for this particular transaction, or as a general source for transactions with fraud components? Why Kroll and why this transaction, versus other transactions you have followed (CCME, FMCN, etc)?

IDG was involved in both Allyes and Framemedia (FMCN acquisitions), the former of which was among the more breathtaking examples of insider enrichment at Focus. So whatever reputation they may otherwise have had is somewhat soured by that association, IMO.

So yes, FMCN's shareholders got looted, a little bit. But this has nothing to do with the legitimacy of Allyes or IDG's due diligence. I would assert that Allyes' management did nothing wrong. This was insider trading on the part of FMCN's managers, who owned shares of Allyes (but controlled less than 0.5% of the company).

Frame Media was a Massachusetts-based startup company, and I don't see any evidence that IDG ever invested in them. Regardless, I don't see any evidence of fraud in that case either.

You are making the classical error in critical thinking known as the argument from authority.

IDG, and funds in general, famous investors, billionaires, etc., are just as prone to errors as anyone else. China Water, Sino-Forest, China Agritech, Longtop, and so many other frauds that ensnared supposedly "smart" money, illustrate that point quite well.

In fact, it could be argued that the hubris displayed by such investors makes them more likely to be defrauded, not less.

Frame Media/Thinking Screen is an entirely different company with no connection to FMCN or to China, for that matter. Shanghai Framemedia is the poster frame business of FMCN and it was in fact an IDG investment. That doesn't mean it wasn't a real company or that there was anything fraudulent prior to Focus' involvement, but IDG's connection to Focus management through 2 separate transactions calls their business ethics into question.

http://www.idgvc.com/en/investment/30/index.html

Furthermore, the shenanigans around Allyes weren't limited to Shen's benefit, as even the article you link to points out. The main insider enrichment occurred when Focus executives bought 38% of the company at a $35m valuation 6 months before selling the company for $200m. Now, it's possible IDG had already moved on by then, but again the point is these guys are connected.

John, it looks like KH is still trading - the books closure would appear to just be for creation of new ADRs.

P.S. Take a look at VISN for another example of FMCN skullduggery. This time it's magically disappearing cash that was supposedly invested in VISN for a 15% stake, just as they were being sued for non-payment of deferred consideration for an acquisition....

I understand the "error of authority", and that is why I have studied this issue extensively, to avoid falling into it.

The top 4 auditors have been fooled on many occasions by Chinese frauds. Starr has been fooled. Many VC investors have been fooled. Hank Greenberg has been fooled. Several top underwriters have made incredible errors by getting involved with IPO's of Chinese small-caps which later turned out to be frauds (Citi, Goldman Sachs, etc). The list of high-profile investors that have been burned is very long indeed.

IDG has never made these types of mistakes. They have invested in dozens, if not hundreds, of Chinese small-cap companies, and have never run into any of these problems. That is a sample size that is too large to ignore. Obviously their due diligence is on another level. And that is why they are in a class of their own.

@ Anonymous 10:47:

You are correct that IDG invested in Frame Media, and it was a different company from the one I mentioned earlier. My mistake. I cannot find much information on this Frame Media. If you have any links with more information, it would be appreciated.

"That doesn't mean it wasn't a real company or that there was anything fraudulent prior to Focus' involvement, but IDG's connection to Focus management through 2 separate transactions calls their business ethics into question."

I don't think you can call their business ethics into question without more substantial evidence.

Was there any proof of wrongdoing on the part of Allyes or Frame Media?

If the only wrongdoing was on the part of the aquiring company (FMCN), this does not say anything at all about IDG or their due diligence/ethics.

General disclaimer

The content contained in this blog represents the opinions of Mr. Hempton. You should assume Mr. Hempton and his affiliates have positions in the securities discussed in this blog, and such beneficial ownership can create a conflict of interest regarding the objectivity of this blog. Statements in the blog are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to certain risks, uncertainties and other factors. Certain information in this blog concerning economic trends and performance is based on or derived from information provided by third-party sources. Mr. Hempton does not guarantee the accuracy of such information and has not independently verified the accuracy or completeness of such information or the assumptions on which such information is based. Such information may change after it is posted and Mr. Hempton is not obligated to, and may not, update it. The commentary in this blog in no way constitutes a solicitation of business, an offer of a security or a solicitation to purchase a security, or investment advice. In fact, it should not be relied upon in making investment decisions, ever. It is intended solely for the entertainment of the reader, and the author. In particular this blog is not directed for investment purposes at US Persons.